Monday, December 05, 2005

Recommended Reading

Been reading Treason by Ann Coulter, and came across a passage at the end of chapter 11 that really resonated:

[Al] Gore said America will only create more enemies if "what we represent to the world is an empire." We must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction because otherwise they might get mad and seek our destruction. He also complained that we have "abandoned almost all of Afghanistan" - rather than making it part of our empire, evidently. He seemed to think it was our responsibility to "stabilize the nation of Afghanistan," "pacify the countryside," and send them valentines. Liberals think war is a Miss Congeniality contest.
One could mine every war-making text throughout history - Sun Tsu, Carl von Clausewitz, Alfred Thayer Mahan - without finding a single reference to being liked by your enemies as a tactic associated with winning a war. Gore said foreigners are not worried about "what the terrorist networks are going to do, but about what we're going to do." Good. They should be worried. They hate us? We hate them. Americans don't want to make Islamic fanatics love us. We want to make them die. There's nothing like horrendous physical pain to quell angry fanatics. So sorry they're angry - wait until they see American anger. Japanese kamikaze pilots hated us once too. A couple of well-aimed nuclear weapons got their attention. Now they are gentle little lambs.
America is fighting for its survival and the Democrats are obsessing over why the barbarians hate us. Instead of wondering why foreigners hate Americans, a more fruitful inquiry for the Democrats might be to ask why Americans are beginning to hate Democrats.

This was written two years ago, and Bush's approval numbers have fallen quite a bit since then, but make no mistake. You and your children will be far less secure if the Democrats wind up running the War on Terror. Failure is the only option for them. Here are some recent remarks by soft-spoken, clear-headed Howard Dean:

Saying the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong," Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean predicted today that the Democratic Party will come together on a proposal to withdraw National Guard and Reserve troops immediately, and all US forces within two years.

That's just great, Howie. You can bet that all the terrorists will be marking their calendars.

"I've seen this before in my life. This is the same situation we had in Vietnam. Everybody then kept saying, 'just another year, just stay the course, we'll have a victory.' Well, we didn't have a victory, and this policy cost the lives of an additional 25,000 troops because we were too stubborn to recognize what was happening."

What was happening was Nixon (Republican) inherited a fucked-up war that was started by Kennedy (Democrat), micro-managed into a quagmire by Johnson (Democrat). He then proceeded to undo the idiocy of their policies and get back on a winning track again with less than half as many troops. We would have won too if, all full of themselves after Watergate unfolded, the Democratic Congress hadn't betrayed South Vietnam and summarily withdrawn all support and basically thrown them to the wolves. But hey, all those millions who were killed by the Communists after the fall of Vietnam weren't registered Democrats so who cares, right?

Dean says the Democrat position on the war is 'coalescing,' and is likely to include several proposals.

Bush and the Republicans have had a single"position" since Day 1: win. Keep your proposals, Howie, the War on Terror isn't a political science experiment. As for "coalescing," isn't that roughly synonymous with "getting your shit together?" Definitely not synonymous with the Democrats...

Here are some other examples of sedition by Democrats.

No comments: